From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: x86@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, pjt@google.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, r.marek@assembler.cz,
jpoimboe@redhat.com, jikos@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] x86/retpoline: Simplify retpolines
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:36:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YDOXSw2vNLzRNdPN@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210218172151.835108198@infradead.org>
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 05:59:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Currently out retpolines consist of 2 symbols,
> __x86_indirect_thunk_\reg, which is the compiler target, and
> __x86_retpoline_\reg, which is the actual retpoline. Both are
> consecutive in code and aligned such that for any one register they
> both live in the same cacheline:
>
> 0000000000000000 <__x86_indirect_thunk_rax>:
> 0: ff e0 jmpq *%rax
> 2: 90 nop
> 3: 90 nop
> 4: 90 nop
>
> 0000000000000005 <__x86_retpoline_rax>:
> 5: e8 07 00 00 00 callq 11 <__x86_retpoline_rax+0xc>
> a: f3 90 pause
> c: 0f ae e8 lfence
> f: eb f9 jmp a <__x86_retpoline_rax+0x5>
> 11: 48 89 04 24 mov %rax,(%rsp)
> 15: c3 retq
> 16: 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 nopw %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
>
> The thunk is an alternative_2, where one option is a jmp to the
> retpoline.
So the reason I originally did that was because objtool could not deal
with alternatives with stack ops. But we've recently fixed that.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-22 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-18 16:59 [RFC][PATCH 0/2] x86/retpoline: Retpoline on a diet Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-18 16:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] x86/retpoline: Simplify retpolines Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-22 11:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2021-02-18 16:59 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] x86/retpoline: Compress retpolines Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-19 7:14 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-22 11:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-18 18:46 ` [RFC PATCH] x86/retpolines: Prevent speculation after RET Borislav Petkov
2021-02-18 19:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-18 19:11 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-02-19 8:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-02-19 12:08 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-02-19 9:28 ` David Laight
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YDOXSw2vNLzRNdPN@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=r.marek@assembler.cz \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.